Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

A. On April 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to construct a new building on the land in Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant building”) owned by the Defendant (hereinafter “instant contract”).

B. The Plaintiff completed the instant building on October 2015 pursuant to the instant contract, and the Defendant obtained approval for use of the instant building on October 28, 2015, and completed registration of preservation of ownership on November 10, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserts that the Plaintiff is obligated to pay KRW 49,200,000 for the construction cost equivalent to the value-added tax payable to the Plaintiff according to the instant contract.

In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the purport of each statement and argument in Gap evidence Nos. 1 and Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 3, namely, ① the part of the contract price of this case prepared by the plaintiff and defendant 492,00,000 won as "value added tax separate", but the plaintiff did not issue a tax invoice, etc. related to the contract of this case, and the amount of value added tax for the elevator, etc. for which value added tax is generated is paid separately between the parties, and the contract price was determined and the contract price was fully paid in full, and ② the lawsuit of this case was filed after October 28, 2015 and delivered to the defendant after the completion of the building of this case, the plaintiff did not request the defendant to additionally pay the contract price of 49,200,000 won equivalent to value-added tax to the defendant for four years after the filing of the lawsuit of this case. In full view of the following facts, the plaintiff and the defendant to this case as well as the construction price of this case.